permalink for this thread : http://search.catflaporama.com/post/browse/2174905
Dibzzz Posted on 10/10/2010 08:54
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

[:D]

They're already on TalkSport saying
"It wouldn't be fair to the fans"
(The West Ham get out clause)

Can't remember the FA being to worried about Boro fans when we were deducted 3 points, which compared to Liverpools sins, was a pretty minor offence..


Link: for sale

alf_wood67 Posted on 10/10/2010 08:57
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

hope so [^]

sixtyniner69 Posted on 10/10/2010 09:06
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

i am pretty sure that darlo and crystal palace had a 10 point deduction[fb]

are the "car thieves" trying to get out of a deduction 1 point less[rle]

boroboymike Posted on 10/10/2010 09:11
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

It's 9 points in the premier league because they only play 38 games. Pompey were deducted 9 last season. I'll be very surprised if liverpool don't get let off like west ham

yozzer_hughes Posted on 10/10/2010 09:17
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

They will produce a get out of jail free card, and escape punishment[:(!]

Rupert Posted on 10/10/2010 09:19
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

no chance this will happen because its 'liverpool'
if it was boro they would take 20 pts off us.

peterkay Posted on 10/10/2010 09:21
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

liverpool will have new owners this week[^]

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 09:26
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Yep new owners for the 'Arn't we badly done to' bin dippers brigade.

9 points deduction, get in there

sixtyniner69 Posted on 10/10/2010 09:30
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

if you were an american businessman and felt you were going to get stuffed for a couple of hundred million pounds by another group of american businessmen.[rle]

quite possibly you might take this to the courts out of spite so that you both lose money [;)]

BillyWindsorsgoingbald Posted on 10/10/2010 10:01
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

They will just get Gerrards lawyer on the case, that'll see them get away scott free.

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 10:02
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Liverpool will get off with it. Of course they will. Just like when Cantona karate kicked that fan. Imagine what would have happened if a Boro player had done that. No there is one rule for one and one rule for another. This is why, as much as I am still and fan and love the Boro, I am no longer blind to what football has become. Where is the funin knowing that the same 2 0r 3 teams will win every year and that you will never beat them unless an Arab or a Russian Mafiosa buys you out. It's boring quite frankly and were mugs for accepting it!

heaton_mersey_boro Posted on 10/10/2010 10:13
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

9 points deduction will not happen; the PL will make sure of it.

If it were Wolves, Stoke, Bolton it would be a formality.

You have to laugh at the PL and their continual allowance on foreign owners taking clubs over simply to make $$$$$.

What is this "fit and proper test" owners have to go through?

The PL are a fking disgrace for allowing this to keep happening.

flipingmental Posted on 10/10/2010 10:23
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Just like when Cantona karate kicked that fan

So an eight month ban and ending up in court is getting away with it. [rle]

Obanmac Posted on 10/10/2010 10:25
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

The news this morning is that they may be declaired bankrupt which is naff all to do with the PL so as a PLC they will be finished.

Joe_Laidlaw Posted on 10/10/2010 10:28
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

How mant point did Leeds get taken off them.

I think they got points taken off them in the PL and the Fizzy pop.

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 10:29
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Cantona served an 8 month ban, and while you're at it Ferdinand served a 9 month ban.....just in case you wanted to use a different manure player as your excuse to dig at a top 4 club.

Liverpool will get off with it.

Obanmac Posted on 10/10/2010 10:37
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I wouldn't count Liverpool as a top 4 club anymore, 7th last season I think and in the bottom 3 atm. Steady decline over the last few years.

Dibzzz Posted on 10/10/2010 10:40
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

They might just make an example of them, with a bit of luck.

Bring the fans back down to earth, not a clue what it's like to struggle have they?

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 10:45
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Ok so they got 9 months for 1.) committing the worst act against a fan ever (forget that he was a national front nobhead, Catona didn't know that! Hand on heart do you think if Deano or Pollock had done that they would have just give him 3 months?
2.)Basically avoiding drug testing because he was obviously cheating. Don't talk schoite. Everyone goes on about cyclist being cheats....they wouldn't have got away with that. Minimum 2 year ban! Ever asked yourself why the big teams have 3 Dr's on staff these days and you never see guys going down with cramp anymore.....EPO!

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 10:51
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

The Drug testing law at the time of Ferdinands ban was an AUTOMATIC 9 month ban, which he served.


petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 11:08
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

[:D]

You've got to laugh at some of the crap being posted on here. The "if that was us, they'd rape our wives and steal our kids" mentality is a particular favourite of mine; always raises a smile.


SYDNEYSIDER, trying to make a point by grossly exaggerating facts makes you look silly. If the FA cared that much about protecting the players at big clubs why were they pushing to get Ferdinand a 12 month ban when he missed one drugs test?



Everyone goes on about cyclist being cheats....they wouldn't have got away with that. Minimum 2 year ban!
---
This isn't cycling though, and if you want to bring other sports into it then go look at athletics and how many random drugs test they can miss before ban.



Ever asked yourself why the big teams have 3 Dr's on staff these days and you never see guys going down with cramp anymore.....EPO!
---
You see footballers going down with cramp all the time, particularly in games that go into ET. Don't let facts get in the way of your wacky conspiracies though.

bolifer Posted on 10/10/2010 11:12
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Rio Ferdinand got an 8 month ban for failing to do a drugs test.
This was not Automatic, as a 2 year ban was the sentence for failing a drugs test. It was not "Automatic" but it was a special "on-off" 1/3 punishment because he played for you-know-who.
The Anti-Doping president at the time said "The sentence is a third of the theoretical maximum he could have got so he's done pretty well from his perspective," he told BBC News 24.
See the full reasoning below:-


Link: Man U get away with it,again

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 11:17
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

When did Man Utd "get away" with a player missing a drugs test before considering they didn't here, bolifer?

bolifer Posted on 10/10/2010 11:24
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

The top 4 or 5 get away with murder Pete - remember Aliadiere getting hit by a Liverpool player and then giving him a slap back. Result,red card and 4 match ban for Boro,nothing for Liverpool.

Remember Man U and Van Niss with his pet ref (was it Mike Riley?) giving him 10 penalties a season to boost their points total.
Are you suggesting the system isn't fixed in favour of the top teams.

PS Liverpool will get away with it.[smi]


upthechels Posted on 10/10/2010 11:26
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I'd like to know what we get away with.

Space_Face Posted on 10/10/2010 11:31
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Get away with it? They haven't gone into administration have they?

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 11:35
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

PETERMANUTDFAN 9 or 12 months for drug cheating is let off. Besides he was probably injured for most of them. He got off with it with his name intact and even became England captain.
Listen mate you can call me a conspiracy theorist but the fact is the Boro got deducted 3 points for nat fielding a side against (if it was sheff weds...please don't crucify me if i'm wrong) and we were relegated. That would never have happened to Scum Utd. Likewise if a Boro player had twhatted a fan he would serve far longer then 9 months.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 11:36
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

[:D]

The top 4 or 5 get away with murder Pete - remember Aliadiere getting hit by a Liverpool player and then giving him a slap back. Result,red card and 4 match ban for Boro,nothing for Liverpool.
---
Remember last season when Rio Ferdinand received a red card, appealed and received a one-game extension to his three-match ban for a frivolous appeal?

No, of course you don't because facts like this don't support your XXXXXXing barmy conspiracies that the top clubs "get away with murder". Facts like this are swept under the carpet because your agenda is to promote this idea that the little clubs are shat upon and big clubs are given an easy ride and left alone.

Problem is, people like yourself are so convinced that the top clubs don't get punished, that if they're not executed for the most trivial of things, you whine and bitch on about injustice and "if that was Boro, we'd be automatically relegated" style nonsense.

Whilst we're here what exactly are Liverpool guilty of that they're going to get away with?

THEBOROBOSS Posted on 10/10/2010 11:37
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

On the Sunday Supplement they said RBS who are owed the money wouldn't get all the money back if Liverpool were put in to administration.

oldsmoggie Posted on 10/10/2010 11:40
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Lets just wait and see but I must admit my first thought was that the powers that be will be busy scouring the rules books to find a get out clause for Liverpool.
They will probably attempt to help them avoid administration as it may be hard to not give them a point deduction once they are in it.

joshie Posted on 10/10/2010 11:43
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Pete, do you think that all clubs are treat equally fairly?

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 11:44
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

PETERMANUTDFAN 9 or 12 months for drug cheating is let off. Besides he was probably injured for most of them. He got off with it with his name intact and even became England captain.
---
So because I show your jibberish up for what it is I'm a Man Utd fan?

Not all Boro fans are sensationalist, irrational morons with massive chips on their shoulders and if in your eyes this makes me a Man Utd fan then fair enough.

Ferdinand missed Euro 2004 because of this ban. So if the FA wished to be lenient, why would they push to extend his ban further rather than reduce it and thus making him available for England selection?

And unless you can actually prove Ferdinand was doping I reckon you should stop suggesting so. Remarks like that get people in trouble.


Listen mate you can call me a conspiracy theorist but the fact is the Boro got deducted 3 points for nat fielding a side against (if it was sheff weds...please don't crucify me if i'm wrong) and we were relegated. That would never have happened to Scum Utd. Likewise if a Boro player had twhatted a fan he would serve far longer then 9 months.
---
Can you prove a Boro player would have served a longer ban than Cantona?

Can you prove Man Utd wouldn't receive a three-point deduction for failing to honour a fixture?

This is the kind of idiotic, bitter rubbish that gets right on my tits.

TMG501 Posted on 10/10/2010 12:38
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Can you prove a Boro player would have served a longer ban than Cantona?

Can you prove Man Utd wouldn't receive a three-point deduction for failing to honour a fixture?

petedreadnought, Can you prove any different?














Just schit stirring[;)]

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 12:50
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

PeterManUtd.....they never proved OJ Simpson killed his wife,, they never proved Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill JFK......we can't prove your a closet Man Utd fan.
What's your point?

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 12:59
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Pete, the closet Man Utd fan....are you Rick4567?[;)]

Jesus i've read some b@ll@cks on here but Sydney, you take the accolade for Conspiracy Theory Poster of the Year.

Look, you don't like Man Utd.....We GET IT.

The_Lizards_Jumpers Posted on 10/10/2010 13:03
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Why would footballers take EPO for what is a 90 minute, stop/start game???

Sh0rny Posted on 10/10/2010 13:05
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

lets not forget chelsea transfer ban which was introduced after the close of transfer window and ban was lifted before start of the new window.

again liverpool will not get docked points

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 10/10/2010 13:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Liverpool won't be docked points.

They'd be in serious danger of going down if they did, and just imagine how much money the Premier League would lose out on in places like Malaysia and Thailand if Liverpool weren't on the TV every week.

People would convert to another club and forget all about the Scousers.

I just don't think the Premier League will punish them in the same way they did Portsmouth. Hope i'm wrong but it just seems unlikely.

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 13:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Oh yeah i forgot about chelsea's transfer embargo being lifted.....And for Syd.......Adrian Mutu
"In September 2004, he failed a drugs test for cocaine and was sacked on 29 October 2004. He also received a 7 month ban and a 20,000 fine from the Football Association. The ban ended on 18 May 2005."

So again Man Utd get away with everything yet Mutu gets a 2 month less ban for failing a drugs test....while Ferdinand gets 9 for failing to TAKE a drugs test!


Syd, this thread is biting you right on your arse!

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 13:10
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I guess if the FA are looking into it, they must be suspicious.
I'm no expert but EPO helps to increase haemoglobin levels in the blood. These carry O2 to muscles. When we exercise we need more O2. Thus it helps to provide that.
From my own personal experience, short, sprints, stop starting is far more tiring than long distance running. Hence, I can see why it would have positive results for a footballer.


Link: EPO

mickymacc Posted on 10/10/2010 13:13
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

In the Cantona incident,were Man U punished for failing to control their players?.(that could be applied to the drugs cheat as well).
The reason people say (not unreasonably) that the big clubs will get away with it,is because they do on the pitch.
Anyone who thinks the big clubs don't have more influence is niave.

grantus Posted on 10/10/2010 13:14
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Liverpool getting into this situation id even worse than Portsmouth, in my opinion, they have huge revenue, are a worldwide brand and already had a foundation of players that had them champions league football every year.

Portsmouth went off chasing the dream (like us in many ways) and are now paying the price for it, (like us in many ways). Liverpool already had the dream and to let themselves get on the brink of administration is a disgrace.

If they do the book should really be thrown at them, let them suffer like Leeds have, they deserve it.

like I have already said, the demise of Liverpool might somehow help football finally find a conscience. So for that reason, I kind of hope it does happen.

I don't think any of us can bare yet another episode Liverpool feeling sorrow for itself, it's already become unbearable, I'm having bad dreams about the "please go away nasty mr american, video"

The_Lizards_Jumpers Posted on 10/10/2010 13:14
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You're no expert on performance enhancing drugs are you?

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 13:16
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

John_Lydon I don't think so. Mutu got caught with coke, which isn't a performane enhancing drug. We don't know what Ferdinand took????
So are you telling me if a sportsman get caught taking a bit of Charlie or an E it is the same as being caught with steriods or epo...muppet. Ferdinand was on EPO or something. The club got wind of the fact that testers were coming and told him to stay at home!

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 13:16
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

lets not forget chelsea transfer ban which was introduced after the close of transfer window and ban was lifted before start of the new window.
---
More rubbish.

FIFA imposed the ban and the ban was lifted by CAS. Why would their decisions be motivated to help the top clubs in England?

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 10/10/2010 13:16
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

grantus - [^]

A lot of commentators/journalists have always said that football will only wake up to the financial side of the game being completely unsustainable when a 'big' club is in danger of suffering administration, or worse.

Let's hope that time is very soon.

The_Lizards_Jumpers Posted on 10/10/2010 13:17
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

* Cringes at a grown man embarrassing himself on a messageboard *

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 13:21
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I just don't think the Premier League will punish them in the same way they did Portsmouth. Hope i'm wrong but it just seems unlikely.
---
The PL don't want the clubs in their league to go into admin and will help as much as they're able to prevent this, much like they did with Portsmouth.


The reason people say (not unreasonably) that the big clubs will get away with it,is because they do on the pitch.
Anyone who thinks the big clubs don't have more influence is niave.
---
More naive than the dumbXXXXXX, unprovable nonsense some people on here are coming out with?

How much influence does Fergie; manager of a big club get when he gets those touchline bans for abusing refs?

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 13:22
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

So why do Corus/ICI do random drug tests? Is it for Performance Enhancing or Recreational?

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 13:22
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Hmmmmm


Link: wolves

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 10/10/2010 13:26
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

There are examples of 'bigger' clubs receiving what some might call 'preferential' treatment though, pete.

Such as Man.United not having a penalty given against them at Old Trafford for about a decade. The Aliadiere/Mascherano incident, countless horrendous challenges from the likes of Scholes and Gerrard that went unpunished, too.

Also, sometimes you'll hear pundits and commentators saying stuff like: 'Well, the ref just isn't going to give that at the Kop end, is he?'

I think they do get away with a bit more than the others, to be honest.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 13:27
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Liverpool already had the dream and to let themselves get on the brink of administration is a disgrace.
---
Hicks & Gillet have put the club in this position. It's their business dealings that have lumbered the club with huge debt.

SYDNEYSIDER Posted on 10/10/2010 13:28
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

John_Lydon WTF u say I'm crazy, what that got to do with anything. They no doubt do drug tests at Corus/ICI for health and safety reasons. Just like if you've had sedatives, they advise you not to drive or operate machinery.
Taking some E or coke isn't gonna make you play any better. However, taking EPO will ensure you can run your socks of for 90 minutes. Or taking steriods etc is gonna help you recover more quickly from an injury.
Two completely different things!

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 13:29
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

So why was MUTU sacked for taking Coke?....

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 13:31
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

There are examples of 'bigger' clubs receiving what some might call 'preferential' treatment though, pete.

Such as Man.United not having a penalty given against them at Old Trafford for about a decade. The Aliadiere/Mascherano incident, countless horrendous challenges from the likes of Scholes and Gerrard that went unpunished, too.
---
The problem is, you get it into your head that this is limited to the top clubs when it isn't. You just choose to ignore the similar incidents that occur at the "little clubs" because it doesn't fit in with your mindset.

Sh0rny Posted on 10/10/2010 13:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

petedreadnought im guessing that Mr Abramovic had a thing or two to do with that

John_Lydon Posted on 10/10/2010 13:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

On 28 January 2010, it was reported again that Mutu had failed a doping test after the Fiorentina vs Bari match (10 January 2010, Serie A) and on 29 January 2010 it was reported that Mutu failed a doping test after the Fiorentina vs Lazio match (20 January 2010, Coppa Italia match), Mutu scored twice during that match, which ended 32. The Italian National Olympic Committee was requested to hand Mutu a one-year ban by the Italian anti-doping prosecutor.[27] He eventually received a nine-month ban on April 19, 2010; the ban will end on 29th October 2010.

ThePrisoner Posted on 10/10/2010 13:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

The PL expicitly stated that the bin dippers would not be deducted points if they went into admin but have since been forced to back-track. To pronounce judgement on a case that has not yet arisen is outrageous but then the PL is not a league voice, it is the vested interest of four brands one of which is run by the Russian mafia.

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 10/10/2010 13:35
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I'm not choosing to ignore anything, pete.

Have you ever heard a commentator say: 'I'm sorry, but you just don't get those decisions at the JJB Stadium...'

I don't recall many other clubs going around a decade at home without a penalty being awarded against them, either.

There is a pressure to maintain the 'status quo' in the Premier League, in my opinion.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 13:42
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

petedreadnought im guessing that Mr Abramovic had a thing or two to do with that
---
Yeah, you would.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 13:54
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Liverpool already had the dream and to let themselves get on the brink of administration is a disgrace.
Hicks & Gillet have put the club in this position. It's their business dealings that have lumbered the club with huge debt.

Or so at other lesser clubs it's the fans fault, you too petedreadnought at times talk s***e, stop thinking you're so sort of media superstar


petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 13:57
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

What are you going on about, erimus74?

grantus Posted on 10/10/2010 14:00
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I couldn't care less who have lumbered Liverpool with the debt, or whose business dealings are responsible. As far as I'm concerned, the owners of Liverpool football club could be the queen of sheeba. For Liverpool to let themselves get into this position is a disgrace.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 14:02
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You don't know much about this situation at Liverpool, do you, grantus?

grantus Posted on 10/10/2010 14:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I know enough petedradnought, but I have no sympathy for Liverpool football club. I hope that if by them going to the wall, football starts to show some responsibility and implements financial governable rules with huge penalties for breaches of them and strict preventative measures, then they go to the wall.

The amount of money in football has ruined the sporting spectacle of the game in this country for me and many other lovers of the game, and I hope for change.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 14:22
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I'm not choosing to ignore anything, pete.
---
Well, yes you are, because you're making a case that the big clubs have some influence regarding certain incidents yet you don't acknowledge that similar occurrences happen at the smaller clubs.


Have you ever heard a commentator say: 'I'm sorry, but you just don't get those decisions at the JJB Stadium...'
---
I've never heard a commentator say it at Anfield or Old Trafford either.


I don't recall many other clubs going around a decade at home without a penalty being awarded against them, either.
---
Doing a look around Man Utd have given away something like 11 penalties in the league since 1998 so either your facts are wrong or you're another who feels the need to grossly exaggerate facts to make a point.

Even so, if you were correct then how does that offer solid proof there's a desire to ensure favourtism is afforded to the top clubs?


There is a pressure to maintain the 'status quo' in the Premier League, in my opinion.
---
Well, whomever this pressure is on is not doing a very good job at it.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 14:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Yet again Peter utter garbage, are you saying the so called 'top 4' do not receive special treatment, or is it everyone, apart from rose tinted glory fans, who think different.

Manfriday Posted on 10/10/2010 14:42
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

How would gillette and hicks lose any money? Didnt they buy the club with the money they got from mortgaging it? As far as i can remember, they didnt use any of their own money

OPEO Posted on 10/10/2010 14:43
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Pete if you think there is no bias whatever toward the top clubs then I think you must be taking something illegal[:D]

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 14:47
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

If your coming from the 'big top 4' club then its perfectly normal.

The gread is good PL, liverpoo will get away scot free because who they are, no question about it[V]

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 15:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Yet again Peter utter garbage, are you saying the so called 'top 4' do not receive special treatment, or is it everyone, apart from rose tinted glory fans, who think different.
---
No, it's generally the sour-faced, chip on the shoulder lot from smaller clubs that do, the ones who try to emphasise such a division with lies and exaggeration then run off never to be seen again when evidence is provided to the contrary.

They'll concentrate on the favourable decisions these big clubs get, but mention when a club like ours does and it's toys out the pram time.

If this "top 4" were receiving special treatment, then why aren't they forever coming up trumps in the Fair Play league, or forever receiving more penalties then every other club, whilst conceding none? Why are their players getting extra bans for frivolous appeals and their managers touchline bans?

Cleveleyssmoggie Posted on 10/10/2010 15:13
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Boring.

joebonano Posted on 10/10/2010 15:18
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

It would be quite interesting to see what happened to Liverpool if the bank call in the loan.
The cynic in me tells me that the PL which is an organisation based on making money and little else would not wish to damage the reputation of the league and in particular one of it's big brands and would do everything they could to avoid taking 9 points off them.
Too much money and self interest at stake.

transitarmy Posted on 10/10/2010 15:19
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

And don't even mention Ronaldo!

Old_Gregg Posted on 10/10/2010 15:21
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"


Have you ever heard a commentator say: 'I'm sorry, but you just don't get those decisions at the JJB Stadium...'


I don't recall many other clubs going around a decade at home without a penalty being awarded against them, either."

Have you ever considered that the so-called big teams tend to attack more, score more goals overall, spend more time in the opposition box, and therefore are almost guaranteed to be awarded more penalties than smaller teams?

Maybe the fact that most teams who visit Old Trafford camp out in their own half and barely venture anywhere near the Man United penalty area is a more logical explanation for the lack of penalties given against them than a huge conspiracy from the FA down to referees?

transitarmy Posted on 10/10/2010 15:30
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Its about pennas turned down against the "big" clubs. Dong Gook had a stone waller turned down against Manure and then get the likes of Rednapp Jr saying "Look he got the ball with the tab on his boot lace" after a super slo mo and Gook already wiped out. And don't get started with the "intent" by Swarchzer(sic)and the penna we got at Old Trafford when the ref was surrounded and Keane in his face.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 15:41
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

What about the penalty Man Utd should have had when Pogi wrestled Ronaldo to the ground just before half time in the game we were beaten 1-0 at Old Trafford in 2008?


erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 15:44
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

PL is bought by the 'big 4'

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 15:53
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

What about the penalty Man Utd should have had when Pogi wrestled Ronaldo to the ground just before half time in the game we were beaten 1-0 at Old Trafford in 2008?


What about the double Ronaldo incident at AP DGL at OT
Shreks foul mouth abuse towards the ref, this time not against the Boro
The time we were given a pen, only one manure player booked
The abuse shrek gave the ref minutes later, same incident, Boetang got booked, the list is endless.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 16:00
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

And?

You seem to think these incidents are limited to the big clubs and that they get away with them?

Remember when Rooney was sent off for dissent against Fulham?

Of course you don't.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 16:36
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Yes I do, probably after numerous other matches where the ref fails to act, the ref was brave enough to send him off on that occassion.

br14 Posted on 10/10/2010 16:51
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Liverpool aren't going into administration.

It's just a ploy by the bank to pressure the current owners.

Why would the bank put Liverpool into administration when the value of the club is barely more than what is owed?

Doing so would probably devalue the total value of the clubs assets below 280 million, meaning RBS would lose out. I suppose they might do it for political reasons. RBS is effectively a crown corporation.

Have to wonder at Tom Hicks. He's a billionaire that could probably buy his way out of this situation in a heartbeat yet chooses to allow the thing to play out. Odd.

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 16:54
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I was expecting a far more compelling argument from you, erimus.

heaton_mersey_boro Posted on 10/10/2010 16:59
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Hicks is a billionaire because of how he is acting; if he were to walk away from business deals with multi million losses, he would be skint pretty quickly.

He wants his money, and rightly so.

br14 Posted on 10/10/2010 17:08
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"He wants his money, and rightly so."

He'll get "his" money back because he put nothing into the club.

Like the Glazers he leveraged the purchase. He wants to make a huge profit.

Should the club go into administration (which admittedly is unlikely), he could end up losing money.

Hicks paid 220 million for the club so receiving 300 million looks a reasonable deal.

If he really values it higher, why not invest the money to realise that value and then sell for a handsome profit?

heaton_mersey_boro Posted on 10/10/2010 17:15
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Well, he must have his valuation and he's sticking to it.

What you say is pretty logical to the average bloke, but to multi millionaires / billionaires something is not adding up.

Think there is an awful lot of bluffing and posturing going on which will unravel over the next few weeks.

br14 Posted on 10/10/2010 17:22
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Thats my point. Looks like there's something else going on here.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 18:37
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

petedreadnought it doesn't matter what I or others say, if I say black you'll say white, if you can't see for yourself that the gready clubs have ruined football well then this topic is not going to prove otherwise, as I said the manu fans of this world look through rose tinted glasses.

Similar to the green & yellow brigade at OT, since the gread is good league kicked in, probably when football was invented in 1992,prior to the glaziers coming in they were buying anyone they fancied and just blowing teams away, the money drain started to slow down resulting in chelc catching them and overtaking em and european teams buying like crazy the gap narrowed and the spoilt manu fans don't like it now with the shoe being on the other foot.

Whats that song they use to sing, 'always look on the bright side of life'

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 18:45
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Right, so you're on about a different issue now.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 18:48
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Think we're talking about the same issue here, didn't you 1st state regarding Boro fans 'You've got to laugh at some of the crap being posted on here. The "if that was us, they'd rape our wives and steal our kids" mentality is a particular favourite of mine; always raises a smile'.

Now arn't those rose tinted fans doing likewise, or is it different as they're a big club



petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 18:55
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You've started ranting about greedy football clubs.

Most of my ranting has been at the nutters on here and their crackpot theories about some PL-enforced plan to ensure the "top 4" say as the "top 4".

Not sure what this "rose tinted fans" stuff is.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 19:12
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

As a Manu fan you probably wont[^]

Old_Gregg Posted on 10/10/2010 19:59
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Classic case of "I've lost the original argument so I'll try and pretend I was talking about something totally different" from erimus [^]

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 20:18
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

erimus, are you a Newcastle fan by any chance?

Hard to believe fellow Boro fans are as barmy as you are.

redhead1 Posted on 10/10/2010 21:20
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

No of course he can't prove any different!

Radio stations are full of it, horror, sympathy for L'pool.

Hang on, haven't they spent a bundle over the last couple of seasons? So instead of accepting that they have made bad buys etc they attack the owners.

Why don't they realise that they are going through a bad spell, get used to it, get over it etc?

Silly references to the Kop, past glories whilst ignoring Heysell, Hillsborough, (someone else's fault and nothing to do with copious amounts of alcohol).

Also what about the disgraceful behaviour of previous L'pool boards who tapped up Ziege, Hamann? does anyone know of the settlements that were agreed in cases such as these?

They will moan about Torres being attracted to better clubs soon, hard to accept lads but it was also for us when Souness, Craig Johnson went from the Boro.

erimus74 Posted on 10/10/2010 21:28
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Classic case of "I've lost the original argument so I'll try and pretend I was talking about something totally different" from erimus

Think if you look back through the threads you realise it going from Liverpool to yourself & peter claiming Boro fans have a chip on their shoulder mentality, I was only coming back at your clubs fans being exactly the same, not a case of 'talking about something totally different'

Up the Boro[^]

careful redhead1 with your last point you'll becoming another 'chip on the shoulder brigade'

petedreadnought Posted on 10/10/2010 21:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Hang on, haven't they spent a bundle over the last couple of seasons? So instead of accepting that they have made bad buys etc they attack the owners.
---
Yeah, you're right. It's the £30m net they've spent on transfers since H&G have been there that has got them in this pickle. [rle]

mickthered Posted on 10/10/2010 23:03
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

In the case of Cantona united were stitched up by the FA fined 20 grand and the FA then also asked united to ban him until the end of the season which they didn't have to do united banned him until the end of the season only for the FA to then fine him another 10 grand and also give him another ban

2003,Neil Mellor and Steven Gerrard were sent off in the pre-season Amsterdam Tournament no ban or further punishment

Fast forward to 2006, when Wayne Rooney and Paul Scholes were handed three game match bans for being sent off in the same pre-season tournament

2010 Patrick Vieira was handed a straight red card in a pre-season game the FA reply If a player gets a red card in a friendly he gets a ban for his next friendly, not for competitive matches,

Ferdinand banned for eight months for missing drugs test and a 50 grand fine
only months earlier Man city player misses a drugs test no ban and a paltry 2 grand fine

The only way to sort this is to have some sort of consistency by the FA instead of looking after themselves they should be looking at the state of English football a bunch of old farts who I personally wouldn't even trust to run a kids party

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 01:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"I've never heard a commentator say it at Anfield or Old Trafford either."

I've heard it quite a lot actually, whether it be Andy Gray or Alan Hansen or whoever may be in the studio talking about a game. If you haven't heard that kind of thing then I suggest that it's you who chooses to ignore things, pete.

Paul Scholes. One of the worst tacklers about, but whenever he takes someone out with a shocking knee-high tackle it's all a bit of a laugh as it's only 'Scholesy' and he 'isn't a malicious player'. I can't really think of another player in the league who consistently gets away with such outrageous tackling.

I recall penalties being so rare at Old Trafford that it became a kind of 'joke' to some, and it was around five or six years ago, when an opposing team, it may even have been the Boro, were given a penalty and it was said that Ruel Fox had taken the last penalty at Old Trafford prior to that in around 1995, which shows how big the gap was.

I understand the 'bigger' clubs may have more of the ball, may spend more time in the opposition half and, as such, will receive more free-kicks and penalties but I just don't see how anyone could think there isn't a pressure to maintain the 'status quo' at the top-end of the Premier League.

Cristiano Ronaldo and his constant cheating, histrionics and rolling-around was another prime example of a player everybody knew was a cheat, but, when it came to standing up to that kind of thing, he was protected. If a player for Bolton or Stoke rolled-around that much then they'd be in the book more often than not.

The FA, the Premier League... they have their favourites.

Eddie_Catflap Posted on 11/10/2010 01:35
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I haven't read a single post of this. Can I just say as a former resident of Liverpool and having stood on the Kop - XXXXXX 'em

br14 Posted on 11/10/2010 03:08
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"I recall penalties being so rare at Old Trafford that it became a kind of 'joke'"

True enough. Man Utd have got away with some corkers over the years, though that seems to have changed in the last couple of seasons.

They do tend to get away with a fair amount. Like the game when Vidic pushed Riggott off the ball leaving Scholes free to score.

But the biggest factor in favour of the top teams is the way prize money is divided.

Not unusual for the top teams to get four times as much as the bottom teams. Not including Champions League. Small wonder the gap between the top teams and the rest has grown since the Premier League started. And that clearly is the intent.



viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 03:17
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Actually, I feel I must be honest enough to admit that I may have made something of an error when I stated earlier that Man.United hadn't had a penalty awarded against them at Old Trafford for around a decade.

I know it was a while in between them being given, around five seasons or so, but Juninho missed one either the season they won the treble or the season after. 1999-2000 some time, I think. Still a long time after Ruel Fox scored his, mind.

I still stand by my opinion that they receive 'preferential' treatment, though.

Dibzzz Posted on 11/10/2010 08:51
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Get in ! Over a ton with a football related post [:D][^]

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 10:53
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I see, viv. So you manufacturer a statement, attribute it to just about every commentator and pundit in the land, and then suggest that if I don't recall hearing it then I'm ignoring it? You're like plazmuh, but without the charisma. [:D]

And this nonsense about the opposition not being awarded a penalty at OT in a decade is exactly that: nonsense. You seem to have confused the fact that no team SCORED a penalty at OT in around 10 years with no team being AWARDED a penalty in that time.

So what now? You conjure up so ludicrous excuses that the PL employ some Uri Geller-style mind tricks to put off the penalty-takers so they miss? [:P]

The flimsy "evidence" you have to support your theory is betraying you!!!!!

Bandy Posted on 11/10/2010 10:54
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

so to conclude, they COULD face a 9 point deduction but the FA will do all in their powers to bend the rules to see that they DONT

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 10:58
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

viv_andersons_nana I think we'll just agree to disagree with the manu fans of this world.

Bandy now you've started it all over again, but you're probably right[^]

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:01
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You didn't answer my question, erimus.

Are you a Newcastle fan?

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 11:02
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

pete - I'm not 'manufacturing' anything. I've heard commentators and pundits say it on numerous occasions. Just because you may not have heard something doesn't mean it hasn't been said.

About the penalty thing, I admitted i'd made a mistake. Why the smugness? At least I had the decency to post and admit that I had gotten it wrong.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:08
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

viv, I'd be more convinced and open to your idea if it wasn't built on preposterous statements like: "It it was Bolton or Stoke...". I've yet to see you provide any proof of this "preferential treatment". Seems it more about your bitterness than anything logical.

Do you really think Man Utd and Chelsea aren't capable of succeeding without some absurd plan by the PL masters to give them leg up?

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 11:12
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Paul Scholes receives 'preferential' treatment.

Cristiano Ronaldo received 'preferential' treatment.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:14
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Karl Henry receives "preferential" treatment.

Rochemback received "preferential" treatment.

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 11:16
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Are you sure about that, pete?

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 11:18
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

viv_andersons_nana I honestly think you are replying to a 'fergie automated reply computer' you can buy them in any good,the 'world is against us' computer shop.[^]

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:25
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I'm as sure as you are suggesting Scholes and Ronaldo receive preferential treatment.

You seem to think if a player dives and gets an advantage it's preferential treatment when a player at a top club does it, but not when someone at a smaller club does.

You obviously have no intention of entertaining the possibility of human error on behalf of the ref, instead you keep clutching those straws 'cos you've got no evidence to back you up. [^]

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 11:31
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

If you seriously think that Cristiano Ronaldo would have got away with the level of cheating he did if he played for an 'unfashionable' club then I find that ridiculous.

It's common-knowledge that Scholes' tackling should receive far heavier punishment than it does. Listen when he next dives in recklessly, you'll probably hear those in the gantry chuckling about how it's 'typical Scholesy...'

Listen also when the next stonewall penalty isn't given at the Kop end... 'You just don't get those in front of the Kop' is a statement i've heard many a time down the years.

I do entertain the idea of human error, pete, it's when said human error seems to surface in exactly the same stadiums, in favour of many of the same players week after week, that you start to wonder.

MightyDuck Posted on 11/10/2010 11:37
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

of course 'the big clubs', and london clubs get preferential treatment.

look at West Ham with the Tevez affair

look at Spurs with the financial irregularities. nothing happened to them while swindon were relegated 2 divisions

look at Liverpool when they tapped up Ziege

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:43
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

viv, you obviously don't watch much football outside of the top few teams so it's understandable you feel the way you do about Scholes' tackling and Ronaldo's diving, but you seem to think FA refs are instructed by the PL to let these players get away with what you consider punishable offences, whereas other players don't. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. The level of consistency in the application of rules is just as bad throughout the football system, it is not limited to a select few clubs.

Your constant relying on manufactured quotes and speculative, unprovable jibberish pretty much sums up how pitiful your argument is.

I'll ask again; do you think Man Utd and Chelsea aren't capable of being successful on merit, they have to receive a leg-up from the powers that be?

MightyDuck Posted on 11/10/2010 11:45
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

they are more than capable, but they do get the benefit of the doubt.

just look at how many penalties visiting teams get at old trafford

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:46
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

So now it's the big clubs AND London clubs. I reckon if this gets to a double-ton we'll narrow it down to every club except Boro. [smi]

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 11:49
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

pete - I'll say it again, just because you haven't heard somebody say something doesn't mean they haven't said it.

I've watched plenty of football outside the 'top' few clubs, thanks very much. That kind of comes with the territory of being a Boro fan for twenty years.

Of course Man.United and Chelsea would still be near the top of the league without a leg-up, but the financial risk of either club not being there is too great to take. The top-end of the Premier League has to be maintained, they have a 'product' to sell you know.

Julios_Hairband Posted on 11/10/2010 11:52
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"Hicks paid 220 million for the club so receiving 300 million looks a reasonable deal."

"Well, he must have his valuation and he's sticking to it."


I think that Hicks has money tied up in loans to the club that the current deal proposes that he doesn't get repaid, therefore he is going to lose a lot of money on the deal at its current price. Argue whether he deserves it or not if you like, but that's the situation as I understand it.


MightyDuck Posted on 11/10/2010 11:54
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

i have mentioned facts about west ham and spurs.

i'd also say that if anyone had as bad a disciplinary record as Arsenal had for years, action would have been taken

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:54
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

just look at how many penalties visiting teams get at old trafford
---
Haven't we put this XXXXXX to bed already? [|)]

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 11:56
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Of course Man.United and Chelsea would still be near the top of the league without a leg-up, but the financial risk of either club not being there is too great to take. The top-end of the Premier League has to be maintained, they have a 'product' to sell you know.
---
Intriguing, considering the PL has been going for nearly 20 years and Chelsea have only really been at the top end for the past 6/7 years. What were the PL doing in the years previous to this to maintain the "status quo"?

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 11:58
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

An uneven distribution of prize-money, maybe?

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 12:02
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

1999 Boro receive a penalty, most manu players surrounds the ref, keane gets book, the ref feared for his life, his words not mine, roll on a few months manu score at the RS, silvestre I think, Boro contest it with a few players surrounding the ref and guess what, the Boro were fined 20,000 by the FA/PL for unsporting behaviour, strange that isn't it.

You can look through your rose tinted glasses as much as you want, the bigger teams gain the advantage

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 12:05
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You suggesting the PL winners should receive the same amount of prize money as the team that finishes 15th?

Also, perhaps you could explain to me how this centralised TV rights deal the PL have gives an advantage to the top teams, you so vehemently claim the PL adore, over the smaller clubs?

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 12:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

The last time Chelsea were out of the top 6 was 95/96. Yes way before Roman arrived with all his evil money.


viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 12:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

No, i'm suggesting there could be a better balance with regards to how the money is spread out.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 12:16
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

erimus, how much were Arsenal fined for failing to control their players in February this year? Or what about Chelsea in 2006 and 2007? Remind me how much Chelsea were fined for carrying out independent drugs tests or for crowd troubles and how much Fergie and Wenger were fined for abusing match day officials?

No one is looking through anything through rose-tinted geggs, I'm not a Man Utd fan either, I just don't subscribe to your embarrassingly weak argument.

Oh, and you still haven't answered my question.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 12:24
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

No, i'm suggesting there could be a better balance with regards to how the money is spread out.
---
A better balance?

Stoke finished 11th and received £8m, half of Chelsea's £16m. What exactly do Stoke do that warrants more prize money?

There's £800,000 increments in prize money for each position in the league. I'd say that's pretty balanced, but obviously this is the nasty PL at work with their "preferential" treatment.

viv_andersons_nana Posted on 11/10/2010 12:50
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Fourth place in the league is now thought of as more of an achievement than winning the FA Cup, or the League Cup.

That can't be right.

We may have to agree to differ on this one, pete.

I believe the more 'fashionable' clubs in the league receive what some would call 'preferential' treatment, and I stand by that.


erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 13:19
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Man u finish top and are already multi millions of pounds richer than stoke/bolton come the end of the season manu receive, for example, 40M, chlc 35M & stoke receive 3M, already before a ball is kicked the following season the gap between the 'gread is good top 4' to the rest is bigger, so obviously that is well balanced, and to your question, obviously I'm getting under your weak theory, so now it's boiling down to who you support, your point is invalid or not, quality you couldn't make it up.

As previuosly stated the manu fans of this world can't see past their rose tinted glasses,fair balanced PL, of course it is

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 13:28
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

But then again we are having a discussion with someone who hasn't got a clue or the history of erimus[|)]

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 14:40
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Still no answer to my question, erimus?

All your disjointed ramblings won't make it go away.

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 14:55
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I take it you understand the meaning of 'erimus' I am and always will be a supporter of my home town club,no glory hunter I'm afraid, not that it makes any difference to this topic, although you seem to think it has.

As previously stated,'rose tinted glasses'[8D]

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 15:06
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

petedreadnought,erimus?

br14 Posted on 11/10/2010 15:10
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"There's £800,000 increments in prize money for each position in the league. I'd say that's pretty balanced, but obviously this is the nasty PL at work with their "preferential" treatment."

It's not the prize money that's unfair. Though you could argue everyone but the top three should receive the same. It's the TV money.

Which meant that in the year we were relegated we received around 35 million while Man Utd received over 100 million from the League.

You could argue they were on the telly more, but that misses the point.

The fact is the system is designed to promote the top clubs to a different level than the lower clubs because the numbers involved are so large.

It's fairly obvious this is a deliberate policy since it's the reason the Premier League was formed in the first place.

The reason Liverpool is in trouble is that they can't keep up with the Premier Leagues big spenders because Hicks refuses to invest for some reason.

I wonder if some kind of league restructuring was promised when they bought the club. Seems odd that the likes of the Glazers and Hicks would get into a risky venture like football (compared to the fixed franchises available in US sports).

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 15:15
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

It's not the prize money that's unfair. Though you could argue everyone but the top three should receive the same. It's the TV money.
Which meant that in the year we were relegated we received around 35 million while Man Utd received over 100 million from the League.

And some would say thats acceptable, strange, the 'gread is good PL' has ruined football

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 15:15
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You're the on that insists I'm not a Boro fan simply because I don't indulge in your bitter, half-baked crackpot nonsense.

If you can't comprehend that other Boro fans aren't as wacky as you then so be it.

joebonano Posted on 11/10/2010 15:32
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

It started off when they stopped the visiting teams get a percentage of the gate money.The way the T.V revenues are split plus the vast amounts generated by the Chumps League mean the elite are on an altogether different financial level to the also rans.It probably explains why the big 4 have been in situ for so long.
One of them has now cocked up off the field so a.n.other is getting a chance.
Why is the Champions League dominated by a dozen or so big fish every year??

PinkPonce Posted on 11/10/2010 15:40
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I've not read all of this but picked up on the part about prize money towards the end of the thread ...

The problem with the money is not the prize money, it's with regards to the distribution of the TV money ...

There is nothing at all wrong with the team winning the premiership getting 15m in prize money, compared to the team who finish bottom getting 800k ... They have won the league and therefore deserve more of a reward ...

However, the TV revenue is dealt with based on how many times teams have appeared on Sky TV, and not shared out equally amongst all teams in the league ...

This is unfair on the so called 'smaller' teams in the premiership because it is Sky who determine who appear on their channels, and hence with it, who receives the most money ...

The attached article shows the TV revenue paid out, over and above the prize money for finishing positions in the league ...

You can see that Manchester United received around 20m more than Derby and 15m more than Middlesbrough ...

The total TV money (815,000,000) should be distributed between all 20 teams evenly (c 40m each) in a similar way that it is dealt with with Americas most popular and cash rich sports) ...

It then doesn't matter if Sky choose to show Manchester United and Chelsea every single week, and teams like Stoke, Bolton, Wolves only 3 or 4 times because everybody has an even playing field ...

How can it be a fair platform for smaller teams, when they have no say in how many times they appear on TV ... ?

Obviously a change will never ever happen though, because whilst Sky are in control of who appears on TV (and hence who gets the most money) they can keep the 'Big 4' streets ahead of everyone else and proclaim the premiership to be the greatest league in the world ...

PP ... x


Link: Premiership TV Money ...

br14 Posted on 11/10/2010 15:50
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

"The total TV money (815,000,000) should be distributed between all 20 teams evenly (c 40m each) in a similar way that it is dealt with with Americas most popular and cash rich sports) ..."

The big difference in the US is that most of the major sports run at a profit for club owners.

Because there's no relegation and promotion, a club can operate lousy teams and still function.

Take the Toronto Maple Leafs in the NHL for example. The only NHL team in a city of 4 million and a catchment of almost 10 million.

Year after year they have crap teams but it doesn't matter because their income remains consistently high.

I think the US owners have been promised a similar set up at some point which is why the Glazers and Hicks etc bought in the first place.

The Premier League was formed in order to distribute TV money more selectively. Naturally because of relegation and promotion the top clubs have arranged things so they're less likely to fall foul of relegation.

But look what happens when they stop spending. Liverpool is just the first. Any of the clubs that are heavily in debt to banks could collapse in the league.

It's why the Glazers transfered their debt into bonds. But they just delayed the inevitable.

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 15:53
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

There is only you that states the PL is well balanced & we 'the Boro fans' have a chip on our shoulder,if I'm getting the upper hand as you kept, for some bizare reason,stating am I am a ucasul fan,for whatever difference that made, then 'wacky' I am.

But thanks for keeping up with me, all the best erimus[^]

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 15:53
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

[^]

Totally agree a far fairer way. Prize money tiered then tv money shared equally. I really don't see why this isn't in place already.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 15:57
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

erimus, do you think you could post that in English?

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 15:58
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

upthechels do you honestly think that fair system would work.

Yes it would be a great success for the PL and football may even resemble a sport instead of the gread that is now the norm, but it won't happen because the bigger teams have the biggest clout, and to assist the smaller clubs they would be damaging their chances of success in the CL, another money making scheme.

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 16:00
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Now, now Peter[V]

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 16:02
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

That's a no then.

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 16:07
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Yes I do.

If we look at Blackpool for a start. They have had a couple of great years but they are now dead men walking imo. Give them an equal share and it levels things up a bit re their chances of survival. We can then look at the top and those pushing for Europe. Villa, Everton, Spurs would all be better equipped to make a real challenge if they just had that little bit more money.

How this would effect the leagues below could be a stumbling block though because the teams coming down would/should be pretty strong.

The rich just get richer and the poor poorer as it stands and that can't be right in the long run. The good of football is at stake and it's becoming a farce re the money involved.

PinkPonce Posted on 11/10/2010 16:10
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I just find it utterly ridiculous and a total conflict of interests that Sky determine which club receive the most money and in most cases it is 15 to 20m more ...

As I say, prize money is fine and there are no qualms with that but payments based on the amount of times you appear on TV is just wrong ...

PP ... x

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 16:12
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

upthechels I think we both & the vast majority of football supporters would agree, but in the real world would the top clubs agree, Blackpool, like Hull a few years back are a breath of freash air, but it won't continue.

How can Blackpool buy players from Aldi & the likes and compete with chelc, manu even Arsenal who shop at Harrods.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 16:14
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Sky will show the games that attract the most interest in the UK. Naturally, the teams with the most support will have their games broadcast more.

erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 16:16
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

So we are back to square one, the rich get richer etc.

UTB

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 16:17
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

TV money needs to be filtered throughout the leagues. Pool the TV money then tier it out to the divisions. That way we wouldn't be getting Joe Blogs earning 200k a week and smaller clubs would have a real chance of staying in business.

If the superstars stop coming then so be it. It'd be more competitive and perhaps some sanity would return.


erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 16:20
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

Or the bigger teams join a europen super league and let the rest of us form a new league system, obviously someone would still be top of the pecking order but not as obscene as it is at the moment.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 16:21
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

And how much difference will an extra £15m-20m make when they still can't compete against teams who are bankrolled by multi-billionaires?

Chelsea aren't in the position they are due to big chunks of TV revenue, they're there because Abramovic's ego.

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 16:21
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

That's why I say Blackpool are dead men walking. They have very little chance of surviving the long haul just like Hull as you say.

The big clubs should be told how it's to be structured not if they're willing to take cuts. They should have no say but they have too much say if truth be told.

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 16:26
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

I can only speak for myself but my whole has been playing English clubs. I really don't want a Euro league to replace what has been everything to me since childhood. I want to play English clubs and would rise up against super leagues.

Nothing wrong with our stadia or passion for the game it just needs managing correctly as they seem to be doing in Germany right now.

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 16:29
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

That's another issue but how do you cap bankrolls??


erimus74 Posted on 11/10/2010 16:35
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

You can't cap bankrolls

And thats the sad fact of todays football, IMO I lived through, probably, the best decade in football, the 70's, & yes Liverpool were the super power then, similar to Manu of today, but other smaller clubs could acheive something, ie, Watford, Derby, Forest, Ipswich even the Boro had a very good team & could of/should of won the League, sadly that is all long gone now I'm afraid

upthechels Posted on 11/10/2010 16:43
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

It's said that Liverpool were bankrolled by Littlewoods back then so I guess little changes. Times have changed because I'd even want Liverpool to win European games back then. Now I enjoy watching them crumble.

Sky, the media, the internet etc have turned many of us into nasty bitters.

petedreadnought Posted on 11/10/2010 16:50
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

It's said that Liverpool were bankrolled by Littlewoods
---
They were, it's just some kids think the sugar daddy trend is a new thing.

IMUK Posted on 11/10/2010 17:09
Liverpool could face a 9 point deduction.

The whole TV Money debate is dodgy ground. We actually have a reasonably fair system compared to somewhere like Spain where they are free to negotiate their own deals and as a result the likes of Barce and Real earn more than the lesser lights. If you don't offer the likes of Man Utd the chance to earn more money for their success and market appeal then they will find a way to drop out of the overall TV deal and go it alone, earning a damn site more than they do now. Some experts believe that is the reason why the big investment companies "want in" on the Premier league action.